Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30740532›Full record

ArticleGlobal vaccines and immunology2018

Comparison of systemic and mucosal immunization with replicating Single cycle Adenoviruses.

William E Matchett, Stephanie S Anguiano-Zarate, Michael A Barry

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global vaccines and immunology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

William E MatchettVirology and Gene Therapy Graduate Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Stephanie S Anguiano-ZarateClinical and Translational Science Graduate Program, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Michael A BarryDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Immunology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

Funding

NRSA Training CoreTL1TR002380 · NCATS · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI Felicity T. B. Enders, ANTHONY John WINDEBANK · 2017 to 2026
$6.0M
Immunoevasive Mucosal Vaccines Against HIV-1R01AI096967 · NIAID · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI BARRY, MICHAEL A · 2012 to 2016
$3.0M
Vaccine Synergy through Synchronous DeliveryR01AI136718 · NIAID · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI BARRY, MICHAEL A, SASTRY, JAGANNADHA K · 2018 to 2020
$2.3M
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR002380NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI096967NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI136718
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

HIV-1 infections occur during sexual contact at mucosal surfaces. Vaccines need to provide mucosal barrier protection and stimulate systemic immune responses to control HIV spread. Most vaccines are delivered by systemic immunization via intramuscular (IM) injection route. While this can drive systemic and mucosal immune responses, there are data show that mucosal immunization may be superior at driving responses at mucosal barriers. To explore this question, we immunized mice with replicating single-cycle adenovirus (SC Ad) vaccines expressing clade B HIV-1 envelope (Env) by intramuscular (IM), intranasal (IN), or intravaginal (IVAG) routes to compare vaccine responses. SC-Ads generated significant antibodies against Env after only a single immunization by the IN route, but not the other routes. These animals were boosted by the same route or by the mucosal IVAG routes. IM and IN primed animals generated strong antibody responses regardless of the boosting route. In contrast, IVAG primed animals failed to generate robust antibodies whether they were boosted by the IVAG or IM routes. These data suggest there may be benefits in first educating the immune system at mucosal sites during HIV vaccination. IN and IM prime-boost were then compared in Syrian hamsters which support SC-Ad DNA replication. In this case, IN immunization again was the only route that generated significant Env antibodies after a single immunization. Following a boost by IN or IM routes, IN primed animals had significantly higher antibody responses than the IM primed animals. Env antibodies could still be detected one year after immunization, but only in animals that received at least one mucosal IN immunization. These data suggest that there is merit in vaccination by mucosal routes.

Indexed as

HIV-1 infectionsmucosal immunizationSingle cycle Adenovirusessingle immunization

Identifiers

PMID30740532
PMCPMC6368267

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.